Is there any chance this could be released as an "official" 3rd party build?

I understand Moonchild's desire to make Palemoon his own product, completely independent from Firefox, and his frustration with the lack of standards compatibility on many web sites and problems with add-on incompatibility. This is the same problem faced by many "minority" browsers, and a large part of the reason they will all probably remain minority. Unfortunately it's unrealistic to expect many web designers to make any special effort to support browsers other than the "Big four" (IE, Firefox, Chrome, Opera), and similarly unrealistic to expect any more than a handful of add-on designers to make special mods for a minority browser, even for those add-on which are still actively supported. It's all very well to say that it is the responsibility of web and add-on developers to keep up, but the reality is that most will not do so if there is nothing in it for them, and the only people disadvantaged by this are the users of minority browsers.

From messages in these forums it is clear that a lot of users, like me, came to Palemoon to find a Firefox-compatible browser without the frenetic sequence of updates, and specifically without abominations like Australis. The fact that Palemoon could run almost all Firefox add-ons, even many abandoned ones, without modification was probably the biggest plus point.

Many of us will also be reluctant to upgrade operating systems (and most likely the hardware to run them) beyond XP just to support a browser, even one as good as Palemoon.

Since it appears that a build meeting these requirements has already been done, I (and I suspect many others) would very much like to try it out.

I think, no. I just not have time to support it "officially". Others... i dont know. Its easy now, but with next changes... i not sure. And this split not very big PM community.P.S.And i make this build just for myself: i have one old notebook with Win XP. Very strange, but latest FF builds (from v.28? just not remember) freeze when i open html page with many flash videos. All tabs in "connected" state... Full cleaning notebook (XP, FF, adobe flash, video drivers etc...) not resolve problem. Other browsers work, PM work. But IE - no addons, Chrome - big memory usage, so...

vitaliy_17 wrote:I think, no. I just not have time to support it "officially". Others... i dont know. Its easy now, but with next changes... i not sure. And this split not very big PM community.

A pity, but I understand why you wouldn't want to take on the responsibility. Tobin produced the XP fork, so maybe he could help. Has to be easier than testing and patching thousands of add-ons! As a minimum it would be a way to keep Firefox compatibilists like me quiet until the add-on situation in PM25 has settled down.

Is there any way I can get a copy of your build to try out? No installer necessary as I run the portable version and I presume I can just unzip the "bin" directory or something.

I will not go against Pale Moon policy. You are on your own if you wish to unwisely revert the GUID change. And remember if you do distribute it you are forbidden from doing so with official Pale Moon branding. It cannot be called Pale Moon or carry the logo. (Except as a private build for yourself)

Trinoc wrote:Unfortunately it's unrealistic to expect many web designers to make any special effort to support browsers other than the "Big four" (IE, Firefox, Chrome, Opera)

Is it unrealistic to expect website owners to stop using pre-CSS scripts to guess browser capabilities that is still being used? Sites have no issue updating their designs to "more modern" layouts every year, but they can't seem to get unhooked from using 20 year old, strongly-discouraged practices. I have much more trouble understanding that.

And on-topic for the GUID-reverted version: No, that version should not be published or distributed anywhere if it carries the Pale Moon logo&branding, as Tobin already said.

This GUID change is also not about "being able to call it my own"; it is not personal at all and purely a technical consideration! This split is required for technical development reasons, mainly related to the very thing that is problematic right now: extensions. Yes, you can revert it right now if you know what you are doing and can build your private build, no there's no guarantee that you can in the near future as Pale Moon develops further. There will also be absolutely no support given for such private builds.

Improving Mozilla code: You know you're on the right track with code changes when you spend the majority of your time deleting code.

"If you want to build a better world for yourself, you have to be willing to build one for everybody." -- Coyote Osborne